how much differnce in gaming performance from a 3800+ to a E6600?

[LAsick]

I currently am running a
AMD x2 64 3800+ skt 939
MSI K8NNEO4F
1 gb mushkin low latency ddr @400mhz (2-2-2-6)
EVGA 8800 GTS 320
soundblaster 5.1
10/ wireless card
windows xp sp 2

*any suggestions on what memory timings I should be running to overclock?

 

[deadseasquirrel]

You didn't list your monitor. But, the short answer is that it varies based on your playing resolution and settings and which game you're playing.

Let's use FEAR for example:

Now this is a GTS 640 and not a 320, but, let's use it as an example anyway. The C2D numbers are from this link.

FEAR @ 1280x1024 4xAA 16xAF
x2 3800+...........72
C2D 6600..........81

1600x1200 4xAA 16xAF
x2 3800+...........58
C2D 6600..........60

We can use just that 2nd link that actually shows a 320mb GTS and analyze only the C2D numbers.

FEAR @ 1280x1024 4xAA 16xAF
C2D 4300..........73
C2D x6800........75

1600x1200 4xAA 16xAF
C2D 4300..........45
C2D x6800........46

I'd put your X2 3800+ somewhere in the middle of the 4300 and 6800. So, in FEAR at least, I would say there isn't much difference. Other games (such as Company of Heroes), that are more affected by CPU speed, may show different results.

There are a lot of other benefits with the C2D when looking at overclockability and application performance such as media encoding. But, for purely gaming performance, I would say the platform switch is not worth it at this time.

 

[MarcVenice]

well, theres quite a difference in clockspeed, and clock for clock c2d is faster. But if you OC that cpu to 2400-2600mhz, I doubt it will be worth it to upgrade to an e6600. As for your ram, only benchmark tools like sandra could tell you. You simply want the most memory bandwith, although on AMD's it doesnt matter to much. You could also use a divider, so your ram runs roughly at 400mhz, and use those timings. You could also overclock your ram, but then the timings will prolly have to go up. As for what is the best, lower timings or more mhz, I'm not sure.

- and squirrel's benchmarks pretty much proved that even without overclocking your x2 3800 should be just fine, for FEAR at least. But I doubt you will get noticable performance boosts in any games but Supreme Commander.

 

[LAsick]

So even with the DDR2,net burst and that stuff you would say it is not worth the upgrade?

 

[Pwntcomputer]

I agree with everyone. I originally decided to make the C2D jump, but after looking around at benchies, it doesn't make sense. I play an occasional game here and there, but nothing serious.

I am going to Ebay the DDR2 I bought and wait for Nehalem and native Quads.

 

[RussianSensation]

I'd probably just overclock the processor, get another 1 gig of ram and call it a day.

That system should last you for another year. After you can upgrade to cheaper Quad or Barcelona. 2400-2500mhz A64 is still plenty sufficient and most games max out the graphics card anyway.

 

[MarcVenice]

Hate to break it to ya, but the e6600 doesnt use netburst, it has been replaced by the intel core microarchitecture, in fact, netburst was pretty much a intel fiasco ... And nope, it's still not worth it ...

 

[cmdrdredd]

It would be worth it if you didn't specify gaming. Gaming is mostly GPU dependant these days. If you were talking about Photoshop and other professional type apps then sure the benefit is larger.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: LAsick
*any suggestions on what memory timings I should be running to overclock?

Your RAM has Winbond BH-6 IC's, so raising the RAM timings doesn't help much, as far as overclocking it goes. The only way to make it run faster, is to give it more voltage (called vdimm, in the BIOS). The good thing about Winbond IC's is that you don't need to raise your RAM timings much at all, when overclocking it. For instance, it will run around 300 Mhz, with 2-2-2 timings, if you give it 4v of vdimm, though I don't recommend giving anything that much voltage; people have done it, though.

For gaming, though, you'd get much more performance, if you'd just double your RAM to 2GB. And to overclock your processor, just use a RAM divider. In other words, lower the speed that your RAM runs at; it will rise again as you overclock the processor.

 

[shiznit]

If you play source engine games such as CS:S or DOD:S then the difference will be big, they are very cpu limited.

 

[magreen]

Originally posted by: deadseasquirrel
We can use just that 2nd link that actually shows a 320mb GTS and analyze only the C2D numbers.

FEAR @ 1280x1024 4xAA 16xAF
C2D 4300..........73
C2D x6800........75

1600x1200 4xAA 16xAF
C2D 4300..........45
C2D x6800........46

I'd put your X2 3800+ somewhere in the middle of the 4300 and 6800.

Wrong. The e4300 beats the 3800+ by about 10-15% in most benches. But aside from that your figures are still useful, and your conclusion remains true -- gaming is mostly gpu dependent.

 

[coolpurplefan]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
It would be worth it if you didn't specify gaming. Gaming is mostly GPU dependant these days. If you were talking about Photoshop and other professional type apps then sure the benefit is larger.

Unreal Tournament 2004 really uses the processor a lot. However, I did read that UT3 is going to use the GPU a lot more even though they say quad cores will help even more.

Whatever, I remember reading a message in the general hardware forum that someone was kind of ticked at the idea that he spent so much on upgrading his machine to a CD2 and found out there wasn't that much difference. I guess it really does matter which benchmarks you're looking at.

 

[NoSoup4You]

I learned my lesson 18 months ago when upgrading from my old P4 3.2Ghz to my current X2 4400+. I kept all the other system parts except I purchased a highend nF4 motherboard. I saw about 1-2fps increase at most in games while playing at max settings, 1600x1200 with 4xSSAA. Simply put, if you're playing at a high resolution, then your GPU is way more important. Having said that, you still need a decent cpu to get good framerates. I'm glad I don't still have that P4 because there's finally a somewhat decent amount of games that are supporting dualcore cpu's, and alot of newer games certainly will also.

I'd highly recommend waiting to upgrade to the Q6600 when the price drops to $266 in July, or at least I think that's when it's happening.

 

[Zenoth]

Originally posted by: NoSoup4You
I learned my lesson 18 months ago when upgrading from my old P4 3.2Ghz to my current X2 4400+. I kept all the other system parts except I purchased a highend nF4 motherboard. I saw about 1-2fps increase at most in games while playing at max settings, 1600x1200 with 4xSSAA. Simply put, if you're playing at a high resolution, then your GPU is way more important. Having said that, you still need a decent cpu to get good framerates. I'm glad I don't still have that P4 because there's finally a somewhat decent amount of games that are supporting dualcore cpu's, and alot of newer games certainly will also.

I'd highly recommend waiting to upgrade to the Q6600 when the price drops to $266 in July, or at least I think that's when it's happening.

NoSoup4You, we both have very similar systems, I'd be curious to know what are your scores in 3DMark05/06, could you please let me know ? Thanks. My 3DMark06 score at the speeds listed in my sig is 8725, for reference.

 

[NoSoup4You]

With the 158.19 drivers, I scored 8589. That's at 2.4Ghz (240x10) and a 5:6 divider to keep the memory at DDR400.

 

[NoSoup4You]

Just for kicks, I changed my cpu/RAM settings to match yours (220x11 and DDR440 2.5,3,2,5). I scored an 8761. That's with my RAM at 2T, although I make up for that by running higher speeds on the video card. The only other difference in my settings from the first run of 3DMark is my HTT is now at 220x5 instead of 240x4.

Interesting, I wonder if trying to push my RAM farther would net even more gains... I'm also curious what a similarly equipped Core 2 Duo would score, like a stock E6600 and another at @3.2Ghz.

 

[corsa]

Originally posted by: myocardia
For gaming, though, you'd get much more performance, if you'd just double your RAM to 2GB. And to overclock your processor, just use a RAM divider. In other words, lower the speed that your RAM runs at; it will rise again as you overclock the processor.

I was thinking exactly the same thing ......he needs more RAM ...and u guys want him to upgrade to a whole new rig !! :frown:

 

[KIAman]

Real world personal experience.

I currently play Vanguard and for those who know, this thing is a super system resources hog!

I have an 8800 GTS and play 1280x1024.

Anyways I went from...

Opteron 165@2.7Ghz, 2gb DDR1

to

C2D e6420@3.4Ghz, 4gb DDR2

Went from around 25-30FPS on max settings up to... 50-75FPS max settings.

Just for kicks, I took out 2 sticks of memory and still get the same 50-75FPS.

 

[RussianSensation]

Originally posted by: KIAman

Just for kicks, I took out 2 sticks of memory and still get the same 50-75FPS.

Which means you were still running with 2GB vs. 4GB. The OP however only has 1GB. Also benchmarking alone doesn't always capture limitation of system memory.

 

[KIAman]

Originally posted by: RussianSensation

Originally posted by: KIAman

Just for kicks, I took out 2 sticks of memory and still get the same 50-75FPS.

Which means you were still running with 2GB vs. 4GB. The OP however only has 1GB. Also benchmarking alone doesn't always capture limitation of system memory.

True, but realize I ALREADY had 2GB of ram and tested 2GB of ram with the C2D setup and got the increased FPS.

And besides, if a C2D is a consideration, so is 2GB of DDR2. It's cheaper than my 1GB of DDR1 ram from my old setup.

Also, this is real world gaming performance, not a benchmark.

Just letting you'all know.

 

[apoppin]

i saw a practical difference in Games going from a P4 3.4EE @ 3.74Ghz to e4300@2.82Ghz ... the minimum FPS came up a bit in FEAR and even more so in STALKER and that was with the same x1950p/512M ... but 1.5GB PC3500 to 2GB PC6400 [making very little difference]

3DMark05 reflected real world performance by increasing from 9300 with the P4 to 10,500 with the C2D ...
not a whole lot ... but noticeable.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: coolpurplefan

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
It would be worth it if you didn't specify gaming. Gaming is mostly GPU dependant these days. If you were talking about Photoshop and other professional type apps then sure the benefit is larger.

Unreal Tournament 2004 really uses the processor a lot. However, I did read that UT3 is going to use the GPU a lot more even though they say quad cores will help even more.

Whatever, I remember reading a message in the general hardware forum that someone was kind of ticked at the idea that he spent so much on upgrading his machine to a CD2 and found out there wasn't that much difference. I guess it really does matter which benchmarks you're looking at.

yes, but either CPU would run the game sufficiently. Most 3800+ CPUs could reach 2.4Ghz and some up to 2.6Ghz+